Now, I had established possible “parties of interest” fossil fuel energy companies; the new energy entry that was competing in Maine directly with the dam, nuclear power; plus all power related investors and ancillary businesses, like transport. However, I had yet to determine the weight of the motive. I had also begun to wonder about Ted Kennedy’s silence on the matter of his brother’s efforts on the dam, especially in light of pressing global warming issues. Why was he not standing up in the Senate and telling everyone about his brother's Dream of Passamaquoddy?

An evaluation of the dam’s delivery format as “communistic” was not the Catholic governance issue needed for the theory I was pursuing. Research revealed Stewart Udall was anti nuclear power, but the missing archives from his department left big holes in my motivation theory.

One evening, web searching brought up a reference to a company called Hydro- Quebec; it mentioned the fact Hydro-Quebec had become government owned about the same time that Kennedy was working on Quoddy. I had lived in Canada for a time as a child and had become opinionated about the French Canadian angst over their culture. I could not see why they had to break away from Canada because they were of a different culture. The very concept of someone putting their culture over their country was something difficult to fathom. When I moved back to the United States, I always followed news stories about Quebec secession. The reference to the French Canadian power company included the fact it was fresh water production of electricity; it had nothing to do with the subject of tidal power, but the timing of its government-owned formation, which ran concurrent with Kennedy’s government controlled effort, along with my long time interest in Quebec, and the Baldwin McDowell file issue of Irish and French Catholic collaboration, made the lead one to follow.

PART FIVE: VOILA!

When I first discovered Hydro-Quebec and learned of the speedy (very speedy) nationalization of the province’s electric industry by the Quebec government, I was amazed. Growing up in the fifties, I was indoctrinated by the American media on the specter of the dreaded communists’ squashing of free enterprise and the socialistic nationalization of corporate interests. While I left Canada as a teenager the summer of 1960, this should have been a big enough story to be all over the news in America, just like Castro’s simultaneous nationalization of Cuban free enterprise was, and yet I had never heard about it. It was a ‘Paul- Fisher- dramatic- reversal’ of the media’s penchant for headlining “red scares.”

Added to a growing list of existing key words, which already included the keyword Charles De Gaulle, were the two words Hydro-Quebec and secession. A reference to a book called The Gaullist Attack on Canada appeared and I set out to obtain the book. Other links that came up led to a discovery that secessionists were virulently anti-Semitic and virulently anti-“Orange Men.” The term Orange Men was how the Masons were known in Quebec, named after William of Orange, the man who would become King George I and send those troops to Oxford ─ and books to Cambridge.

When I received the book The Gaullist Attack on Canada, written by J.F. Bosher, a French Canadian, who was an anti-secessionist, it was initially disappointing to see that its focus was from 1967 on, and not the period of interest from 1959 to 1963. Nevertheless, I opened the book and saw that there was a short chapter on the pre-1967 efforts of De Gaulle to encourage separatism and destabilize Canada. At the end of this short chapter, Bosher gave a brief mention to Hydro-Quebec. By the time I finished the short section, I had the Catholic governance issue I was looking for.

Hydro-Quebec, Bosher explained, originated in 1944. Maurice Duplessis was a conservative, pro business French Canadian who ruled Quebec as its Premier from 1936 to 1939, and again from 1945 to his death in 1959. A liberal defeated him in 1940. This liberal would take government control of a small power company in 1944 called Hydro-Quebec. There was a noisy outcry and the liberal Premier was defeat by Maurice Duplessis in 1945. Duplessis would refuse to continue the plan of the defeated Premier to nationalize the other eleven private power companies in Quebec. During his long tenure as Quebec’s Premier, this policy remained unchanged.

The liberal, Jean Lesage, won the Quebec Premiership on June 22, 1960 and chose Rene Lévesque, a former journalist, as his Resource Minister. Lévesque, supported by what Bosher called “neo-nationalists” at the newspaper Le Devoir, moved immediately to try to nationalize the power industry. Bosher say that this push to nationalize power was helped by the encyclical Mater et Magistra (Mother and Country), issued by Pope John XXIII in 1961. The paper used its appeal for social justice as a rallying cry. The Pope managed, in his short reign of five years, 1958-1963, to write this document, recommending state intervention for the common good. By 1962 the small company created in 1944, Hydro-Quebec, would take control of all the Province’s remaining eleven power companies.

The Catholic governance issue addressed in the Evangelical Should a CatholicBecome President was now an issue Calling John Kennedy's Quoddy Dam “communistic," must be an example of Paul Fisher’s “Aesopian language,” saying one thing and meaning another, and I immediately reported this find to Paul Fisher. He again pooh-poohed my find. “Oh, I am sure John Kennedy . . . was not paying any attention to Papal encyclicals.” he said. Fisher would eventually relent on his analysis. I will tell you more about this later.

Communication with the author of The Gaullist Attack on Canada, Mr. Bosher, was established, and he recommended reading another book written by the pro succession, French Canadian journalist, Jean-Francois Lisee, called In the Eye of the Eagle.

Sensing that this part of the story was going to be very complex and convoluted, I diverted my attention during this period to include researching English Canada’s position on these issues, and to try to find out about Canada’s involvement in the dam. I had learned from J. F. Bosher’s book that Canada did not have a law like America’s Freedom of Information Act. They had restricted access to archival information, and they were suspicious of all researchers, Bosher said. After 1989, you had the right to ask for information; the Canadian government had the right to deny it to you based on very liberal criteria. The Canadian National Archive site was online, and I contacted them to find a researcher. The procedure was to pick an “authorized, outside” researcher from a list that the archivist provided. The archivists were not allowed to search their own files.

I picked a man named Douglas Campbell, the most English sounding name found on the list. Understanding the rules made me certain that I would probably only get a smattering of information. I contacted Mr. Campbell in February of 2001. I told him what I was looking for, and exactly why I was looking for it. I knew that if I were on track, I would never fool anyone that had access to the information I sought. Mr. Campbell agreed to do his best and get back to me. I turned my attention back to the books of the French Canadians.

J. F. Bosher is a scholar and professor; his book is about the efforts of Charles de Gaulle to splinter Canada in two with the recreation of “New France” in Quebec. Jean François Lisee, the journalist, focused his book, In the Eye of the Eagle, on the views of American Presidents and their administrations on the possible creation of a new North American country. Both men feature the French Canadian public figure, Rene Lévesque; he is the star of the Lisee book.

Rene Lévesque, viewed as “the heart” of the secessionist movement, came to fame in Canada as a broadcast journalist and charismatic talk show host. He had strong ties to the American military, having joined and served as an Army intelligence officer in World War II. Lévesque came to power in public life as the Resource Minister of the Lesage administration, elected in Quebec in June of 1960, just before the election of John Kennedy to the United States presidency. Ultimately, Rene Lévesque would reach Quebec’s Premiership in 1976.

Quebec, in 1960, was a ram's horn of intricate and convoluted alliances that had evolved, according to Bosher, from the domination of the province’s politics by English-speaking businessmen, who ruled the economic life of the Province of Quebec, and by the dominance of Catholic clergy, who presided over every other side of provincial life. Quebec’s governance would become even more convoluted under the Lesage administration.

Bosher’s book goes into exhausting detail to set the scene for what would become know as the “Quiet Revolution” in Quebec. About the same time John F. Kennedy gave his Dream of Passamaquoddy speech in Augusta, Maine, Charles De Gaulle cemented his economic plan for his Fifth Republic, and Rene Lévesque shaped Jean Lesage’s platform to promise a more France-like interventionist government. As soon as Lesage was elected, his administration moved to secularize provincial society with the creation of a new Education Department that would wrest control of the Province’s educators from the Catholic clergy ─ and he moved to nationalize the Province’s power companies, molding them after France’s EDF (Electricité de France).

The Lesage government came up with a name to justify their attack on the Catholic Church’s influence in Quebec. They called themselves the “New Catholics.” Bosher said that up until this time in its history Quebecers did not have a strong affinity for France. They had escaped the Masonic influenced Deist period that France went through, with all of its emphasis on the secularization of society. The French in Canada were staunchly Roman Catholic and thought as little of the “Godless French,” as the French thought of the Québécois accent, which was another source of contention between the two cultures. All this would change in 1960. Immediately after the Lesage government came to power, Bosher explained, legal and illegal French intervention began aiding and abetting a Quebec government bent on secession from Canada, and the former U.S. Army intelligence officer, Rene Lévesque, began the process of secularization of Quebec society.

The theme behind Bosher’s book is that the English-speaking power structures in business and government did nothing to stop the meddling of De Gaulle. Nor did they criticize Rene Lévesque’s interventions of the 1960 Lesage government, or his actions when he became Premier in 1976. Bosher could not understand why they did not. No where in Bosher’s well informed book, giving exception detail of the times, does he mention what was on the drawing board as Hydro-Quebec’s competitor ─ the Passamaquoddy Dam. Bosher’s revelation of the close association Lévesque had with American’s military intelligence puts consideration on the table for the possible presence of a higher purpose, some trade-off, for the American and Canadian media and government silence on what was truly an aberration of North American, free enterprise business and government policies.

Jean Lisee begins his book In the Eye of the Eagle with an introduction to Rene , Lévesque explaining Lévesque’s “pitch” to America on the case for secession. Lévesque thought the Americans should liken his cause to the Boston Tea Party. American administrations likened his cause to the South’s secession, except for one, he said. “And he was of gargantuan proportions,” Lisee dramatized.

Lisee’s chapter on John Kennedy begins with his run for the U.S. Senate, and it documents Kennedy’s efforts to woo away the predominately Republican, French Catholic vote from Henry Cabot Lodge. The Kennedy tactic was to win over a popular French Catholic American priest, Armand Morissette. I would initially only read three chapters of Lisee’s book, because, while I first thought substantiation for Masonic fear of French and Irish Catholic collaboration for the Pope was present, I found the chapter fell straight down the credibility hill after the “gargantuan proportions” quote. Lisee never comes close to proving Kennedy supported secession. He cites Kennedy’s support of independence for Northern Ireland and his general opinions on colonialism, and not much more but gossip.

In other research, I had found that the Irish Catholics and the French Catholics did not even like each other. They spoke different languages, had different cultures and competed for standing with the Pope. In America, especially New England, they competed with each other for economic benefit. When I had read the letter in theBaldwin McDowell File about the collaboration of the Irish and French bishops, one possibility I considered was that it was an early example of a disinformation campaign. Now I thought Lisee had written an updated version of the same tactic; therefore, the task was to find what this possible disinformation was masking. Lisee’s first chapter mentions the nationalization of Quebec’s power, but does not even mention Hydro-Quebec by name. Nor does he mention the Quoddy Dam. I found that books on politics provide clues to follow based on what theyleave out of the book, equally as much as they produce clues by what they put in.

Despite the fact J.F. Bosher’s book The Gaullist Attack on Canada predominantly addresses the year 1967 on, reading the entire book to find out more about De Gaulle, who had presided over the building of the La Rance tidal dam, was a necessity. The book has strong credibility, and it has the remains of many Starbucks’ drippings throughout its pages. Bosher and Lisee both discuss the FLQ (Quebec Liberation Front), a violent element in Quebec’s deck of secessionist cards, with communist leanings.

Bosher speculates the FLQ was a Gaullist based front, for after all, he pointed out, there was communist infiltration of France; France had a strong leftist element, and France was viciously aggressive. Bosher cited France’s terrorist actions against Greenpeace to substantiate this last observation.

Lisee, on the other hand thinks the FLQ was a CIA front, American intervention to make the secessionists look unstable and bad for everybody. To back up his claim, he cites the fact the FLQ actions looked a lot like our intervention tactics in Chile, and he points out the sporadic and benign nature of the FLQ actions, such as blowing up the statue of General Wolf, which sat on Quebec’s Plains of Abraham as a testament to the French loss of Quebec and English domination. Both conjectures sounded plausible, and given the convoluted ways of every country’s intelligence services, it just could have been that everyone was infiltrating everyone to make the FLQ into a smorgasbord organization.

There was a clue of omission in both books. There was one accidental maiming and one accidental death attributable to early FLQ members. Both authors left out any mention of the FLQ operative arrested for the accidental maiming, a young man, who with his death in 1971, would become the most famous and mysterious FLQ terrorist of them all, Francois Mario Bachand, and more about this terrorist later.

PART SIX: BLAME CANADA

On June 11, 2001, my last day of a visit to New York to see my daughter, I was packing to leave for the airport and listening to news of the American terrorist, Timothy McVeigh’s, execution, when I decided to check my voice mail and found a message from my chosen Canadian researcher, Douglas Campbell. I returned the call from Miami. Mr. Campbell began by apologizing for taking so long to do the research; he had had an accident and broken his hand. Expressing concern, I asked when it had happened. “Last week,” he replied. I skipped the obvious retort.

It has been a very, very long time since we spoke on two or three occasions, but I learned a good deal from Mr. Campbell about the history of the times being researched, and about Mr. Campbell himself. He was a talking fact book on Canadian history and its foreign relations with other countries. He had majored in computer science and then returned to school to get a degree in history. Irrespective of his computer literacy, Mr. Campbell claimed to be unable to communicate by e-mail because he had no computer. He said he was mailing the material he had found, but sometime later, when it had not arrived, I called him to check on its whereabouts; he apologized, saying he was off on a trip with some Air Force pals. I did finally receive the materials. The documents that arrived, though not large in number, advanced my knowledge and premise significantly.

Campbell sent photocopies of newspaper articles on the dam. The Canadian Foreign Service office collected them in American cities. They were copies of originals pasted on a memo format of the office sending them. It was clear they had been checking all American papers for articles on Canada and the dam. I was ecstatic to see some of them were the missing stories of May Craig, a famous female reporter. Her paper, the Portland Press Herald, stationed her in Washington. One of them was a report on the dam, which did discuss the enemies of the project and actually showed a picture of the Edison Electric anti dam leaflets that the company distributed to their customers.

What was important about this group of his materials was what was missing from the package, specifically the October 23, 1963 Christian Science Monitor and the October 20, 1963 New York Times stories and reprints of the President’s Orono speech, which in microfiche cited the wrong year, 1717. There were other stories from both these papers in the group of gathered newspaper articles sent by Campbell. I called Mr. Campbell back about the missing stories. I told him that as it seemed it was his Foreign Service office’s procedure to monitor, clip and send articles on the dam from these specific papers, the stories must also be in the archives. I asked him to look again, and asked for other research. He did send more information, but not the missing stories.

The possibility that the stories were never clipped is below nil; either they were clipped and lost, or eliminated, or they still exist in the Foreign Service archives and were not sent. Paul Fisher had said there were thousands of records missing from the archives of law enforcement from the Kennedy era. The Canadians do not have to destroy material to keep researchers from getting to it; therefore, my bet was that they have them still. In e-mail to the Boston Globe editor on this segment of "my story," I ended with the exclamation: “Oh Canada, please confess!” Given a desire of competing energy technologies to stop the dam, it could not be limited to the United States. Given a conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy to stop the dam’s precedent, it had to be a conspiracy that was international in both scope and design.

The articles from the Canadian papers were useful also. One of them drew the analogy between Quoddy and La Rance output capabilities. I could then take the original La Rance output information and combined it with the Canadian news story to put the Passamaquoddy Dam's capacity in perspective. None of the American information succinctly disclosed the implications of Quoddy. Neither side of the battle seemed inclined to make the case for or against Quoddy, based on how much it would hurt private power companies. The Quoddy Dam, four times the size of La Rance in its installed capacity, was capable of serving twelve million people, which was all of 1963’s New England population, and it was the first of five possible dams on the U.S. side. Canadian waters had much more to offer. It was an alarming turn of events for private power, for fossil fuel, and for all the investors of competing energy companies and the people that worked for them.

A news story about a speech by Kenneth Holum, an Under Secretary of the Interior, was also there. Made to labor groups, it featured remarks on the soon to be dam. Campbell's copying of the document skewed the first paragraphs of the story, resulting in their magnification. Mr. Holum’s words “. . . we don’t say if Quoddy is built; we say when Quoddy is built,” made it clear ─ the Quoddy dam was a done deal, just before JFK’s death.

Much of the Canadian material consisted of internal memos between and for members of the Canadian committee overseeing the dam’s progress, plus members’ communications back and forth between Ottawa’s Foreign Service Office and other Canadian government bodies charged with overseeing studies and policies concerning the dam. One was an additional photographed copy of the above-mentioned Holum “when-not-if” speech, which the Canadian Embassy in Boston had sent to Ottawa, on October 22, 1963. The Ottawa Foreign Service Office notation on the side of the document showed that they had redistributed the memo to the dam’s Canadian committee, on November 26, 1963, four days after the death of our President.

Many of the memos disclose the Canadian viewpoint of America’s political issues with the dam as well as Canadian political issues. Some explained the history of efforts to build a tidal dam in the area, going back to the lobbying efforts of Roosevelt’s friend, Dexter Cooper.

Tidal dam engineering is “Rocket Science”; it has extremely complex engineering and construction. The best explanation of the dam came from Campbell’s Canadian compilation of material; it was a joint Canadian and U.S. study, originated during the Eisenhower administration, and should have been in our country’s archive. The 1956 study, presented to the joint U.S. and Canadian committee cited a 3 billion Kilowatt hour capacity, but in 1959, a report on the same dam took it down to 1.8 billion Kilowatt hours. The Kennedy Quoddy Dam, in its final configuration, was to have produced 1000 Megawatt hours, or over four times France’s La Rance Dam, but still 50% less than the 1959 study and 300% less than the 1956 study.

One theory I posed to myself, in order to solve the perplexing question of why the dam had a ever decreasing proposed installed capacity, was the possibility hydro proponents were scaling back their initial efforts to make it more palatable and less threatening to existing power sources, basically to trick them; however, I later learned that Armand Hammer, of Occidental Petroleum was a close friend of Roosevelt and knew Dexter Cooper; therefore, he had to know what the total capacity of the area was, and how it might effect his and other fossil fuel producers’ interests. The proponents of the dam could not have slid the potential of tidal power under the fossil fuel rug. Armand Hammer bought the Roosevelt summer home from the Roosevelt family in 1952, the year that Kennedy started to push for the dam; he would buy Occidental Petroleum in 1956.

The 1959 report was the best layman description of the construction and engineering of the dam. Kennedy was racing to be the first in space, and he was racing to make America first in tidal dam construction. The press followed the first with great ardor and, outside of New England, gave the dam less than a thousand words.

Conversations with Douglas Campbell were long, hours not minutes. I took no notes, as it was quite a chore to keep him talking. I tried to pull hen’s teeth, asking him repeatedly why it had been so easy for the Lesage government to nationalize the province’s free enterprise electric industry. He finally mumbled something like: “They (the power
companies), were not making any money anyway; Quebec was mostly a rural province; it was not an issue.”

According to Campbell, the Canadians were blasé about the dam. Their official position during Kennedy’s administration was that as long as it did not cost them anything, and as long as there were no outcries from the fishing industry, they would cooperate. They thought they would even get some free electricity from it. How much power the central government in Ottawa had to influence policies as compared to the autonomous power of the Province to push it through on its own is a question I did not ask of Campbell. I did learn from him that New Brunswick had just elected their first French Arcadian Premiere, Louis Robichaud — French and Catholic. There was a Catholic troika propelling the Quoddy Dam — Kennedy, Muskie and Robichaud — a troika that I would later document was implementing the social justice philosophy of a foreign, Roman Catholic Pope.

Campbell discussed Premier Robichaud’s role in New Brunswick’s history and suggested I read a book called Louie Robichaud and The Big K.C., referring to K.C. Irving, the Canadian oil baron, who made his home in New Brunswick. Apparently, they did frequent battle. I asked Douglas Campbell if Robichaud was still alive. In 2001 he was. While e-mailing the Globe editor, I tried to impress upon her the need to get men like Robichaud and Udall, and for that matter, Ted Kennedy, on the record before they died.

The Canadian memos after the assassination read like the script to the feature length South Park cartoon Blame Canada. The Johnson administration, the Canadians felt, was trying to place the blame on Canada for the quashing of the dam.

PART SEVEN: MR. SPEAKER

Concurrent with the Canadian research, during a nightly search on the Internet, the Carl Albert Library came up. Searching his file and the file of Cornelius Gallagher, whose archive was in the same repository, brought up quite a few references to Quoddy and with it an issue ─ the nationalization of power. Ten months of manipulating key words finally produced material that was an indication the Quoddy Dam was not just an isolated policy of Kennedy and his administration. Apparently, there was a true debate going on over the attributes, advantages, and disadvantages of private and public power. I sent for the complete file. It never arrived. The library claimed they mailed it. It still did not come. Calling yet again and paying for a second copy, produced a package about the size of two legal reams of paper. The materials arrived just before I left for Boston on September 10, 2001.

Returning from Boston after America's trauma, I cast the material aside and later moved it to a glass storage box by my desk. About three months later, a second package arrived from the Carl Albert Library, postmarked July of 2001. Obviously, it was the first package the library had claimed they had mailed; it contained the same material. Puzzled by its long delay, I still did not read the material and put it in the glass storage box, with the first set of materials. One night, months later, sitting at my desk writing checks, the red border that surrounded the material caught my eye. Finishing my sundry check writing chores, I removed the material and sat down to read it. When I had finished the material, my long pause from research on the Quoddy Dam was at an end.

The first item to catch my eye in the Albert material was a February 1963 copy of a Fortune magazine article. Perhaps I was wrong and there was a publication that mentioned the Quoddy Dam, a major one, belonging to Skull and Bones member and Time magazine owner Henry Luce. Titled There’s No Stopping REA ─ or Is There?, the article traced the history of the Department of Agriculture’s Rural Electrification Administration and its leaders.

The author explained the “new reality” of REA. It was “. . . troubling the agency’s congressional friends and alarming the U. S. electric-utility industry.” As America grew, REA became no longer rural and its Co-ops were becoming very large and “increasingly engaged in aggressive, government-subsidized competition, with the investor-owned electric-utility industry.” They were exempt from federal taxation and financed below cost, the article’s author explained. They got first call on cheap hydropower.

Please note the author admitted hydropower was cheap. Oil has always been a bad choice for energy conversion. If you put a barrel of oil into a refinery, run around the other side of the refinery, and put your barrel in front of the output spigot, your barrel will only be one third full, when the conversion completes. If you then take your barrel of gas and dump it in your car, two thirds of that gas goes up in the air in the combustion required to power your car; therefore, today, when you say sixty-three dollars a barrel, you really need to say one hundred and eighty-nine dollars a barrel, to effect the Colbert Report’s 'truthiness' about the real cost of oil. Coal is a much better use for energy conversion, but coal is the biggest offender when considered as a global warming contributor.

Getting back to our anti-REA author, Hubert Kay, he sums up the introduction to a very long, well-written article defining the issues with this statement: “Having clearly outrun the intentions of REA’scongressional founders, they constitute a growing threat both to American principles of private enterprise and to the gigantic private investment in the U.S. electric industry.” Please take note of his use of the word “gigantic.” Finally, here was the motivation theory’s weight, clearly defined. (At the time I read the article, the worldwide power industry was an 800 billion dollar a year industry and that dollar figure did not count the money made by their raw fuel providers. It grows exponentially every year.)

The author next turned his attention to the new Kennedy administration. Kennedy’s REA administrator was Norman Clapp, the brother of Gordon Clapp a former TVA administrator. Clapp, when answering his critics at a national rural electric cooperative association meeting said: "It is perfectly plain that this opposition springs from big business and its political allies. These are the culprits who are trying to hang the socialist smear on you.” Hubert Kay, the journalist telling this amazing story, then quoted Clyde Ellis, described as a former Congressman from Arkansas, turned lobbyist, and sometimes called, “the man who runs REA from the outside.” Ellis had made a statement at a conference of western states about private power companies, declaring: “Their objective is to take over the government. They are public enemy No 1─ more dangerous than communists, because communists are not a threat, but dictatorship is a threat.” The world’s much more dangerous Catholics and power company executives had now both diminished communists.

Hubert Kay was sounding a lot like the author of Behind the Lodge Door, Paul Fisher. He was crafting a conspiracy with his typewriter and, like Fisher, was doing a very good job of it. Kay then brings Kenneth Holum, President Kennedy’s Assistant Secretary of the Interior for water and power, front and center in the argument as “the man in charge of the power produce by the gigantic public dams.” At this point, I thought surely the Passamaquoddy Dam would be coming up in the story shortly, but it did not. Not one word —repeat —there was not one word mentioned about the Quoddy Dam in this entire well-written, comprehensive word battle on private versus public power.

Passamaquoddy was to be the biggest source of power for the REA; Holum was running around saying; “We don’t say if Quoddy is built. We say when . . .” Therefore, as a journalist, he was clearly derelict in his duty by not mentioning it, or left it out on purpose. This Fortune journalist, Hubert Kay is not one that could be excused as not knowing about it. He even mentioned Washington-based Edison Electric Institute’s analysis of the advantages the public power company TVA had over private companies. There was a 56% disadvantage for private industry. Edison Electric Institute was fully aware of the dam. The Quoddy Dam plan was to be the TVA of the north. Patterned after the TVA, it was to give its electric to public power companies and cooperatives. Today the TVA has changed; its electricity routes overwhelmingly through private power companies.

Kay then, in a section of the article titled “The specter of nationalization,” gives up the mother load for the Quoddy story and the weight of the motivation to stop the dam, but still produce a viable alternative for the immediate need of the U.S electric industry, which fossil fuel could not, at that time, meet. He gives substantiation for why a fresh water Hydro-Quebec-like dam would be much preferable to the private power companies over the feared Quoddy, when he discusses a fresh water hydroelectric dam’s reliability. He states that due to their dependency on varying rainfall: “To become a dependable source of electricity in season and out, the output of hydro generators must be supplemented or “firmed up” by the fuel burning generators . . . that produce most U.S commercial electricity,”

Hubert Kay then goes on to hint at a Kennedy administration conspiracy by addressing all the “funny coincidences” in the actions of Kennedy and his administration: Kennedy called repeatedly for increased public power development; he urged for more loans to public power; he called the Co-ops “a happy middle ground between private enterprise and public cooperation,” and he declared that “the role of REA isn’t finished.”

Again, here was a perfect opportunity for the Fortune journalist to bring up the monumental consequence of the Quoddy Dam as part of the “funny coincidences.” Kennedy had publicly spoken about the Dam, but Hubert Kay said not one word. The burying of the Quoddy Dam’s “telltale-heart” was clearly premeditated before JFK’s death

Hubert Kay ends his article with a recommendation to “banish the specter of nationalization,” by enacting a recommendation of a congressional advisory committee, made in 1955, the year the Catholic governor of Maine repealed the Fernald Bill. The committee formed with the purpose of eliminating government activities “competitive with private enterprise.” This committee specifically recommended that the REA be “transformed,” Kay explains, into “a self supporting institution securing its own finance from private sources.”

There you have it! Kay had not seen this recommendation enacted during the Eisenhower administration, which presided over the initial forward motion for the Passamaquoddy Dam, and he would not get it enacted in the Kennedy administration.
Kennedy would announce a green light for Quoddy on July 16, 1963 in the Rose Garden of the Whitehouse. The assassination would take place in November of 1963.

We were kept looking south —to Louisiana, Florida and Cuba — after the brazen assassination of our President. The press had us chasing shadowy, rogue, former CIA agents, mafia figures, and Cuban Americans. The press printed stories quoting speculation that it was because of the Vietnam War; it was because Kennedy was threatening the Fed, the Mafia, and the Teamsters.

They should have faced us north to the Quoddy Dam, Quebec secession, Hydro Quebec, and the warring parties in the Fortune article. The Quoddy Dam is the only issue that correlates with the Oswald timeline and his sudden conversion to a walking, talking communist.

The next to last thing I did in my e- mails to the BostonGlobe editor was to tell her I was going to fax the Hubert Kay’s Fortune article to her; she gave me her fax number and confirmed the article’s receipt. I sent her another e-mail and asked for her thoughts and comments on the article. She did not reply. She was not a retired journalist, like Paul Fisher, and did not go on the record with a discussion of the article. Henry Luce’s Fortune article, "There is no stopping the REA . . . Or is there?” abruptly ended our e-mail conversation, or at least her side of it. I sent another and final e-mail to her called "Redemption for a Nation.”

NOTE: Recently, I discovered, during research on carbon sequestration, a gentleman named M. K Hubbert, a famous and long time Shell oil employee, know for developing the “Peak Oil Theory,” and a resource advisory on John Kennedy’s National Academy of Sciences. A possible question becomes: Is Hubert Kay a pen name for M.K. Hubbert and was the article There is no stopping the REA . . . Or is there?” a warning for JFK?

Carl Albert, the powerful Speaker of the House was in the Kennedy camp. How the dam was to obtain the 800 million dollars needed for its construction was an open question now answered.

There was another item included in the Albert material that was of great interest. It was a speech by a Mr. Lynch, a power company executive, given in different parts of the country to private power companies and investors. This speech and the Kay article in Fortune were a tie-in for two entries in Paul Fisher’s notes from the Masonic New Age. An entry in the March 1963 issue that began “To the aggressor, belongs the future . . .,” and one earlier, in March of 1961, which began, “Shall it be necessary to write a new Constitution . . . .” These utterances were quite clearly a call to arms over some unnamed foe. “What on earth is this about?” I had asked Paul Fisher. He said he had no idea. It had obviously caught his attention; he had selected it to write down. When I read the Carl Albert file, I was no longer in communication with him, and so did not have him available for discussion of the Lynch speech

I did ask Fisher at the time, seeing these entries in his notes, if this obvious call-to-arms could possibly be related, or referring to Pope John’s encyclical. Mater et Magistra, published two months after the March 1961 New Age article crying for the need for a new constitution. Paul Fisher pointed out the Pope’s work had not been published until May, 1961, but after much argumentative pressure from me, he finally conceded, it probably was on the streets and known about a good deal earlier. While it does not use the exact same phraseology as the New Age article, the Lynch speech to electric company executives and investors, also addresses a threat to the power companies’ bottom line, which is therefore a threat to the Constitution and its principals. “The stakes are high,” Lynch reiterated across the country. His speech is also a call-to-arms; it was a toned down version of the New Age article. Lynch would become the head of the power companies, Edison Institute in Washington D.C. after Kennedy’s death.

I was finally able to document that the encyclical Mater et Magistra was well debated and known about in Kennedy’s Washington; I found a reference to an August 25 1963 Time story commenting on a story by former CIA employee, William F. Buckley, in his conservative New Republic magazine. Mr. Buckley wrote that he found the Pope John XXIII document “very disturbing.” It was the second time he had attacked the Pope’s document Mater et Magistra .

In my last e-mail to the Globe, I told the editor: “I view the state of global warming and current events in this nation as a direct result of the assassination of JFK and the quashing of his Dream of Passamaquoddy . . . slow motion retribution, if you believe in God. If you do not . . . then a natural progression, given no viable, developed substitute for fossil fuel . . . and a rabid enemy bent on our destruction.”

PART EIGHT: FINALLY, THE TELLTALE HEART

During the second phase of research on Hydro Quebec, after my 2001 hiatus from the project, I was sitting on Lincoln Road, in South Beach, reviewing translated research obtained from Montreal. They were news stories from Quebec papers, both English and French, during nationalization of the power companies in 1962. After arguing with myself over a valid evaluation of the behavior, pro and con, of players in the fray of Lévesque ’s interventionist predilections, I decided that the nationalization of power had indeed ─as Bosher observed in his book, The Gaullist Attack on Canada, gone down Canada’s throat like an oyster. The few editorials against Mr. Lévesque’s government power grab were meek and mild, a little smoke ─ and no fire. In particular, there was no outcry in English speaking Canada, or from our country.

This was a very significant oddity. I had return to Miami from Canada in 1960 to blanket coverage of Fidel Castro’s government interventions and free enterprise takeovers, and my mind looped from this thought to a statement remembered vaguely from the few chapters of Lisee’s book, which I did read in 2001. Then I suddenly recalled Douglas Campbell’s statement about Quebec’s power companies “not making any money.” I walked home. By the time I reached the front door of the building, I had built up so much energy, that I sprinted up the stairs to release it, tore through the house in search of the Lisee book, and found the quote I was looking for. It was about the financing provided for the upstart, government controlled Hydro-Quebec and its expansion. It read:

“Quebec critics, who feared their representatives, would be treated like Bolsheviks, if they ever stepped on Wall Street again, were proven wrong. In fact, New York investment house, Halsey Stuart offered to advance the 200 million needed to finance the Quebec project up front . . . .” Lisee goes on to tell his readers: “Willis Armstrong, an American diplomat at our embassy in Ottawa, laughingly observed that while American interests on Wall Street were offering to pay for the nationalization of power in Quebec, U.S. shareholders of Quebec power companies were being bought out to accomplish the government take over.”

The 1962 quote of 200 million dollars translated to 20 billion in today’s dollars. If you did not know about Quoddy, this would look odd only for Wall Street’s financial support of the nationalization of a free enterprise industry, but Wall Street did know about Quoddy. They were railing against the REA, as a perceived huge step toward the nationalization of power in the United States, and Quoddy threatened to wipe out their investment in New England power companies.

Quoddy was full steam ahead in 1962. In Campbell’s material there was a Canadian briefing, giving the opinion that this time Quoddy was going to make it because of … “the President’s great interest and commitment to the dam.” More dams were planned, and the United States was offering to pump free electricity over the border to Canada. Given the existing Hydro-Quebec was not a money maker, it would lose even more when Quoddy came on line; therefore, it would be very, very odd for Wall Street investors to risk this great sum of money . . . unless, perhaps . . .they knew the competitor, Quoddy, was not going to make it ─ and they knew why.

America did need all that extra electricity by 1980. In 1989, while researching the oil industry, I had learned the fossil fuel business had fallen behind in expanding their infrastructure refining capabilities, because they were waiting on favorable tax legislation for their industry from Congress.

Quebec offered traditional hydropower from fresh water dams, a source the public was already familiar with, and not the vast ocean reserves that could quickly replace the other technologies. Hydro-Quebec was fulfilling an unavoidable need that could be contained, and would not threaten the ongoing use of fossil fuel in power production. Voila, a telltale-heart, beating loud and clear, but the American public could not hear it, because we did not know about Quoddy, or its implications. I now read the rest of the Lisee book.

Fast forward to 1977. Newly elected Premier Lévesque speaks to Wall Street, asking for more money, to finance more dams, to produce more electricity for US needs. He also speaks to them about his secessionist ideas. Lisee comments the reaction to his talk of secession upset Wall Street greatly; nevertheless, he got all the money he needed to expand from the Wall Street investment bankers.

Now all of New England sat in front of Quebec’s altar, negotiating much needed power transfers for their states. Edmund Muskie, then President Carter’s Secretary of State, led the procession. Lisee’s book states that on one occasion Ted Kennedy refused to be in the same room with Lévesque.

There is a good deal of commentary about our dependence on Hydro-Quebec on the web. Of particular interest is Vermont’s Senator Patrick Leahy’s effort in Congress to break his state’s onerous contract with the Quebec Company, as well as the columnist William Safire's worries over the significant amounts of Arab investment in Hydro Quebec, and how secession might affect us in the future.

Much like the Quoddy Dam, it was difficult to find out just how much of US. electricity now comes from this source, but I finally found a Cree Indian web site that gave the figure. It was a whopping 25%. As I write this story, current events in Canada demonstrate the effect of the success of Hydro-Quebec. It has given the Province the economic power and financial feasibility for succession from Canada. Recently, it was reported, in a move that surprised his own legislature, Premiere Harper rose and made a proclamation that Quebec was a nation within Canada. This maneuver was, our national media said, designed to preempt a plan by secessionists to stand up and declare Quebec a nation, but not mention Canada, the stories said. Culture over Country: Will the United States be next? NOTE: I went back to CNN.com to search for the story to quote it, and I no longer can find it in a search; however it was still on Canadian news sites.

PART NINE: FRANCE

The French researcher I used was very able. This phase of information gathering magnified the worldwide effect of planned tidal dams, in Russia, France, and the United States.

France is the most puzzling part of the Masonic connection because they are of a different ilk than their counterparts in Europe and the West. Masonry is often accused of being anti-Christian. This is most true in France, the birth mother of Deism. The Third Republic cemented the country’s secularist bent and Masonic influence. I would learn from my French researcher that De Gaulle ran against Mitterrand, who was the “Masonic” candidate.

It was under De Gaulle’s aegis that the La Rance Tidal Dam won the right to be called first. The power industry in France, the EDF, was already nationalized. It became so right after World War II, when there was a strong leftist bent in France.

France, according to an EDF executive, began a real debate in the forties over hydropower and fossil fuel, and later nuclear power; it was thermal to the right and hydro to the left, in French politics.

The U.S. Secretary of the Interior, Stewart Udall had an anti nuclear counterpart in France. His name was Robert Gibrat. My researcher sent me a speech made in France at the end of his EDF service on his life long pursuit of the tidal power option. He was a die-hard proponent of the technology his entire life. He tells the story of how he went to his office on a Sunday afternoon, in 1940, to get a head start after first coming to EDF. He began to organize his department. He came across a storage box and a 1920 engineer’s report on France’s tidal power potential and its required engineering. Gibrat relates that as he read the material he became excited to the point of mania. In this speech, Gibrat also went on the record confirming the assessment of Roosevelt’s Quoddy engineer. Gibrat’s opinion was that Roosevelt’s plan was a weak plan, designed to fail as an energy option, while putting people to work for a time in the depression — basically a WPA program.

Gibrat would devote his life to the battle for tidal power for the next twenty years. From France the researcher sent me documentation outlining the on-going twenty-year battle between thermal and hydropower options, and all the politics that went along with it.
I have one statement that says that Gaullists were on the hydro side, but nothing specific about the President’s personal opinions Had I continued with my research, I would have turned to the records of Charles de Gaulle’s think tank, formed in 1950, to see if I could get further documentation on De Gaulle’s energy ideas. The bottom line was that La Rance was built while he was in power. The battle between tidal and nuclear power was extremely heated during this time. After the attempt on De Gaulle’s life, the pendulum swung to nuclear power in a very big way. Not only did the tidal power option die, the EDF eliminated the engineering discipline for tidal power construction from their training. Today, France gets most of its power from the nuclear option — more than any other country — and as a result has a huge nuclear waste problem. It will take them another sixty years to bury what they have now.

The assassin, who made the attempt on De Gaulle’s life in August of 1962, was a secret society member of OAS, known as a group formed to fight Algerian independence. Caught, prosecuted, and executed, the assassin said his motivation was stopping Algerian independence, but the war had started in 1954, the Evian Accords for Algerian independence had been signed, and Algeria was already an independent country at the time of the assassination attempt.

Kilowatt savvy is vital for anyone trying to understand what “cost efficient” means. One of the first reports received from France was a discussion of electricity that explained the difference in a megawatt and a megawatt hour. It provided a conversion chart that I would use on all my previous and future research. This report also codified the area of the Passamaquoddy Bay and Bay of Fundy as possessing the capability for 3307 Gigawatt hours of installed capacity —a zillion, billion times greater than the amounts discussed in the reports of the fifties received from the Canadian government, and Blue Energy’s estimates of only 200,000 megawatts for all the lower Pacific and Atlantic coastlines of North America.

By the time I got to the La Rance history, I already knew that Gibrat really wanted to start with the waters off the famous Mont St. Michele, because it had a good deal more capacity. But what I leaned now is that the La Rance plan Gibrat was allowed to implement at 240 megawatts represented only 18% of the total capacity in the La Rance channel; it was a prototype dam. The dam at La Rance was not a two-pool plan like the Kennedy plan, but it did use turbines that were capable of capturing the surge from the ocean and the reverse flow from the river when the tides ran out. Initially, La Rance used both, but the turbines were relegated to one-way use until 1982. Then they were used both ways, and now have been restrained again.

A report received from France, written in English, states unequivocally, the potential of Mont Saint Michele as 60 million times the potential of La Rance. With my newfound conversion charts and tables of Europe’s electric usage per capita, I determined this area had the potential to light up all of Europe.

During the time I was working with a translator from Florida International University, I found out from her that there was a big battle going on in France over re-privatizing EDF, the country’s government owned electric company. The British had already accomplished privatization.

The summer of 2006, there was an article in an U.S. paper stating the French government planned to dredge the channel that was threatening to make Mont Saint Michele into a peninsular, rather than an island. As an aside, the story said they planned to build a tidal basin while they were saving Mont Saint Michele. The translator from FIU lived only ninety miles from La Rance, but never knew the dam existed. Researching nuclear waste in France on the Internet produced a report saying that France was behind other countries in the development of alternative energies. The report never mentions the fact France had produced the first tidal dam in the world, and even once had an engineering school solely devoted to the tidal dam construction discipline. When La Rance was finished, its grand opening was not put on De Gaulle’s schedule, one news article said. He showed up, unannounced, to a small cadre of second-string reporters.

Still, other reports talk about not only the great potential of France, but also the great tidal potential of Russia. I never attempted research in Russia for obvious reasons, but this report also described a restrained prototype tidal dam, built by the Khrushchev administration. A historical look back at tidal power was another item sent from France. Apparently, 1921 was the year that the power of the sea came into fashion in France and in England. There were even special societies formed dedicated to studying the use of the tides. The English looked at tapping the potential of the Severn. They are still looking at tapping the potential of the Severn.

PART TEN: MORE ABOUT WATER

Scientists have told us that what we have to fear most from global warming is water, the melting of our polar ice caps, all the resulting miserable after effects ─and rain. All records were made to be broken, and that would include the biblical 40 days and 40 nights.

It is therefore a welcome irony: Water can save us also. At the current juncture, the alternative energies on the table are either woefully inadequate, or worse than our current source. Ethanol takes one and half times amount of fossil fuel to produce its equal Ethanol energy, and its energy coefficient is even worse than gasoline; it takes one and half times the amount of ethanol to go the same distance as gasoline.

There is also the argument that it is immoral to use food to fuel our tanks rather than feed people. If you do your math based on the world’s arable land, you will find that we would have to take all of it, have nothing left to feed people, and still, we would come up way, way short on the amount needed for our tanks by a huge percentage. Wind and sun are an unreliable source, as wind and the sun are not always in evidence. The alternative fuel suggestions that are being offered now are ruses, to placate the public’s rising awareness of the warming problem.

Hydrogen fuel cells are the worse option because they have an emission ─ water vapor.
Scientists have discovered that as an unexpected result of global warming, the water vapor in our atmosphere is increasing, which in turn is making the problem worse. The more water in a cloud, the more heat it can hold. You do not have to be a scientist to see if you converted all cars to output water vapor, you might have a problem worse than our current one. The fossil fuel industry is desperately trying to maintain the lucrative refuel concept at the expense of true progress in eliminating global warming.

The fossil fuel companies are toying with wild ideas like burying carbon dioxide. They are spending a goodly sum commissioning geological surveys to determine if it is safe.

AFTERWORD: There will be a section on carbon sequestration, methane hydrates , mud volcanoes, Pingoes and formaldehyde appended to this story. Called: “It’s the methane hydrates − Stupid; it is the horrifying legacy of JFK’s death

We do not need oil, coal, or gas; we never did. Blue Energy’s estimate of 200,000 megawatts of ocean power available from the lower North American continent, is far below the French study’s estimate of 3307 Gwh from the Passamaquoddy and Fundy area alone. The United States and Canada have used only 2% of their fresh water capabilities. You will read in some articles that the technology for ocean power is new, or new advances have been made that now make it more feasible. Wave power is new; the geothermal use of ocean heat is newer, but none of this is true about tidal power technology. The President of the United States, George Bush, agrees. On November 1, 2006, he cut off government funding for hydropower research with the statement that it was a well-established technology, which did not need any money for research. He is right. Reinventing the turbine is like reinventing the wheel. Once you have the basics you can only add bells and whistles.

There was a small story in the Miami Herald ,in the spring of 2005, about a former oil company executive who was trialing turbines in Florida’s Gulf Stream. Conveniently and quietly, without a peep, the state of Florida had passed a law extending its water boundary from three miles out to twelve miles in the Gulf Stream, thus allowing turbines to be put in the Gulf Stream under Florida’s control. Another company, Vendant Power, is trialing turbines in the 9-knot East River in Manhattan. A company with Miami offices is applying to the Federal Energy Commission for permission to put “not yet commercially available turbines” in the waters of John Kennedy’s Passamaquoddy Bay. Small town newspapers in Maine are reporting on battles for the right to put turbines in the state’s tidal rivers, and Blue Energy is still puffing up their press releases. Even the Arab news channel, Al Jazeera, has done a story on tidal power, and there is an Iranian environmental group online quoting Blue Energy’s comments on Kennedy’s dam.

In Latin America, Brazil and Peru are thinking of tapping the rivers that run between them to negate dependence of a natural gas pipeline from Bolivia. Environmentalists are railing against it. Environmental groups are attacking this effort for the potential to cause methane gas to escape from dead vegetation for ten year after a dam floods an area. Of course, using fossil fuel has no end to emissions; dams do. May I remind you of Paul Fisher’s statement about fossil fuel companies using environmental causes for their own good?

My translation: These companies are slowly pulling the ocean-power-option-rabbit out of the hat, to make it look like it is a new technology, not one that has been obstructed and buried for eight-five years. They are most probably backed by fossil fuel or traditional power groups. They know that the ocean option is a government application. They are positioning themselves to have the right to tap into the government’s supply as free enterprise players; that is —if, and when, the government decides that the atmosphere just might possibly be collapsing, and they can either convince fossil fuel companies to give up their ship, or be wrestle to the ground by the rest of the world. The press is going along, printing small stories here and there, but not doing any in depth stories, on what should be jumped on as a very big story the minute they saw it. The company Ocean Resource Group, with offices in Miami, and New Brunswick, puts the technologies potential on the line, stating we only need 1% of the available power from ocean currents to light up the world.

Time magazine’s comprehensive cover story on global warming, done in the spring of 2006, does not mention the huge potential of this option, just like their story, so long ago, in their sister publication Fortune, did not mention the Quoddy Dam. Some things never change, including journalism complicit with political positions. Of course, if the government is in the clutches of fossil fuel, as Vanity Fair magazine says it is, then we will watch them fiddle while we burn.

There is a very large investment and a long payback time for tidal technology, and ocean installations will need the protection of the Navy. Rivers and streams are possible for free enterprise, but there is another option on the horizon. There is currently being marketed a small device to power a home if the home has a stream on the property. You do not need a real stream. You can use a faux stream with a constant recycling of reusable water over turbines, which recharge the pump’s battery once in motion, and the same goes for powering a car. This is a free enterprise application with tremendous potential, especially for large multifamily and office buildings. There are non-combustion engine patents for cars that have been languishing in the public domain for decades, including one that runs on water. Again, we do not need oil, coal, or gas. We never did.

PART ELEVEN: LEE HARVEY OSWALD

In 1963, I watched my country− and the world − follow the death and funeral of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy. I never read the Warren Commission Report. As Gore Vidal, the author, said: “Conspiracy never happens in America, because conspiracy NEVER happens in AMERICA!” My government said Oswald acted alone and that was good enough for me. Yet — the minute I saw the efforts of John Fitzgerald Kennedy at Passamaquoddy Bay, I instantly changed my mind.

Many thorough investigative authors on the Internet have documented the sheparding of Oswald’s life, from the time he was sent to Youth House and the Protestant Big Brothers in New York, until the time of Kennedy’s assassination. Oswald talked the talk, but never walked the walk of a communist, much like the famous spy Kim Philby, who talked the talk of a fascist, when he was really a communist spying for the Russians on the West. Oswald did not even go to party meetings while in Russia. He only went to parties — and joined a hunt club, where he proved he was not a very good shot.

There are incredibly good web sites that document Oswald’s connections — and his connections’ backgrounds — and connections — and the connections and backgrounds of his connections, etc, etc. Mainstream media has never put the spotlight on this information.

Many books suggest a CIA conspiracy, such as Jay Edward Epstein’s Legend, The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald; Lee and Harvey by John Armstrong; and Reasonable Doubt, by Henry Hurt. All these books have agendas. Armstrong accuses Epstein of working for the CIA and protecting the Bush family’s connection to George De Mohrenschildt, Oswald’s social director in Texas. (Epstein only mentions the Rockefeller family connection to Demohrenschildt.) This is an interesting accusation, given the man ostensibly committed suicide after his first day of interviews with Epstein in 1977.

The book The Secret War Against the Jews, written seventeenyears after Epstein’s Legend, does mention the Bush family’s connections to this man, and goes into depth about Demohrenschildt’s connections to the oil industry and the intelligence world, but it does not mention the man’s connection to Lee Harvey Oswald. John Armstrong also mentions in his book that the Bush family pressured Billy Lord, Oswald’s bunkmate on his tramp steamer trip to France, the first leg on his journey to Moscow, to talk to Epstein. Lord had joined the Airforce after his teenage trip with Oswald to France, and was then working for the Bush family’s oil company, according to Armstrong.

The site I listed above for the early years of Oswald’s saga has good material on the teenage Oswald’s early handlers, including their connections to religious leaders and Masons. When I finished reading about Oswald, my opinion was that it was clearly a plot of the powerful and venerable, with many more times the circumstantial evidence present that has been used to convict many lesser citizens. The movie JFK really left out a lot of excellent information that is available and has been verified. Stone mentions a stand down of the secret service, just prior to the assassination, but he does not show us the film of the incident. It is on the web; the agent that seems perplexed is not assigned for the ride to the Texas School Book Depositary.

Please also search under the key words Steve Kangas and Overclass for explicit information on the proven history of the CIA’s infiltration of the media, institutions of higher learning, and religious organizations. Kangas also lists here the contribution of Catholics to the CIA and Cold War efforts that have been recognized by their church. Paul Fisher is not on the list. Fisher had explained to me that the CIA placed Catholics, for the most part, in counter-intelligence. Two Catholics, who were in intelligence and on the list, died from ostensible suicides. After being mentally stable for their entire lives, under strange circumstances, they destabilized and then supposedly killed themselves. They were James Forrestal and Frank Wisner.

I would like to add two observations that no one else has. Search under the keywords Warren Commission Report, Oswald, and passport. The section on Oswald’s passport for his 1959 trip to Russia appears. The number of his passport was 1733242. The year 1733 is equivalent in American Masonic history to England’s 1717. It is the year of America’s founding of the first Masonic Lodge in Boston. It is also the address of Masonic headquarters in Washington D.C., at 1733 16 Ave. This is a fact none of the JFK researchers, or Masonic members of the Warren Commission ever pointed out. I am sure Paul Fisher noticed it, and perhaps it is what set him on the path to suggesting that there were Masonic steering currents in the assassination. If I were a professional journalist, working for a company that had the power to find out whom else was awarded American passport numbers starting with 1733, and if the numbering scheme itself were out of sequence, I would have done so by now. Masons leave numeric droppings and clues everywhere. I am sure code breaker Paul Fisher found them all. I believe it is their way of bragging about their secret history.

The History Channel did a very interesting series on the assassination of JFK. One of the segments pointed to a French connection: a shooter, or a second shooter, which escaped along railroad tracks that Oswald photographed. Perhaps this network was fed information by the same “old spies with a conscious” giving information to the authors of The Secret War Against the Jews.

There has been much debate as to whether Oswald, in his limited exposure to firearms, preformed well or not. There has been no debate about the fact that the number of times he picked up a gun to shoot was very few. Therefore, if you were to go with Oswald the patsy and fall guy as fact — and not fiction — those that spent ten years plotting as they watched the Catholic Prince become King, would never have depended on Oswald to shoot the gun. Given Oswald did not fire the gun and only brought it to the Texas School Book Depository, then please consider as the possible gunman, not a French connection, but rather a French Canadian connection. If Oswald did fire the shots, then my theory is he thought he was a man that had been ordered to save the Republic of the United States of America by killing the Catholic usurper, but I believe he was the “patsy” he claimed to be.

The History Channel also did a story about Jack’s older brother Joe. It seems he was not shot down by the enemy; he was shot down by the British pilot behind him, an accident it was said. The History Channel then did a story about Lyndon Baines Johnson and the possibility he was involved in the assassination of JFK. The latest blurbs on the Internet say now that it was Johnson and Hoover. In the book The Secret War Against the Jews, the authors quote old spies with a conscious, but do not name their sources. Yes, perhaps the same sources did provide truth for the History Channel efforts, but it seems to be they are scapegoating the lowest denominator, perhaps to get justice for Oswald and Kennedy, while exempting the majordomos of the plot.

My theory says it is now a four-tiered conspiracy. The first tier, those who actually plotted or knew the assassination would take place, probably numbered about 800. They, for the most part, were powerful and venerable men from all over the world, primarily the west, but certainly including Russia, and they included leaders of religion, business and the government.

Then — my theory says — it got easy; if you understand the rules of a secret society — it got very easy. When I reach the end of this essay, I will post two papers that are reference material for this written effort: One is about the evolution and psychology of the secret society; one is about Jewish Kabbahla and the Christian Cabala that evolved into pagan use by the Masons. (These papers have all the proper source notes. This essay will also eventually have them. My research now totals a very large amount of material. I do not earn my living as a writer and do not now have the time to do this in a complete manner. I am in a hurry to get this story up because of its significance for the fight against global warming)

This second tier was the cover-up men, men with secret society memberships, which could be counted on to follow the orders of their senior, secret society members — out of fear. They would and could control the investigation and its presentation to the public through the media. The secret society membership of many, many Hollywood entertainment people would make sure the right movie was never made.

My theory’s third tier throws Fisher’s theory back at him and makes Catholic leaders co conspirators in the cover-ups of the 70’s investigations; others, who figured it out over time, combined with Catholic leaders to force the re-opening of the investigation in the seventies. It closed saying JFK’s death was most probably a conspiracy, but never named any parties of interest. Investigators then, my theory says, traded political gain for their silence. Epstein, whose book, Legend, supposedly, triggered the reinvestigation of the assassination, is my pick for the ‘Jewish-chick-up-front.’

One of the many books that I brought home from Miami libraries on Masonry was a book called Jews and Freemasonry in Europe. As coincidence would have it, a well know Israeli scholar went to Harvard as a Fellow during John Kennedy’s administration. He chose as his research topic an analysis of the relationship between Jews and Freemasonry in Europe.

The man does a very good tap dance of scholastic effort, but sums up distancing Jews from Masons, attempting to prove Freemasons have nothing to do with real Jews or their religion. His book, researched at Harvard, was not published after John Kennedy died; it was published in 1970, two years after Robert Kennedy died.

Given:

Mr. Fisher’s thoughts on the conspiracy’s possible origination — Masons; Jewish intelligence prowess; the fact Oswald’s supervisor in the Minsk factory he was assigned to was a Jew; the efforts of a Jewish scholar to distance Jews from Freemasonry, coincident with Kennedy’s term in office; Epstein’s omission of the Bush connection to George De Mohrenschildt in his book Legend; and finally — the premise of the book The Secret War Against the Jews: Jews got their state by garnering information on the misdeeds of western leaders.

Therefore:

We have a bunch of Hubert Kay “funny coincidence,” all of which leads me to believe that quite possibly, while Catholics probably put it together after the assassination, Jewish intelligence may have had at least an inkling of what was afoot, and whose shoes were making the footprints — before Kennedy’s death.

My fourth tier is the ongoing conspiracy of silence of our government and media, in the face of excellent circumstantial evidence that Oswald did not act alone. And —the burying of John Kennedy’s tidal dream, even in the face of global warming. I concluded while working on this project it is neither love nor money that makes the world go round. It is blackmail.

George Orwell, a British intelligence officer and the author of 1984, said that the greatest lie is the lie of omission. John Kennedy’s Passamaquoddy Dam has been left out of American history. Francois Mario Bachand, the man totally left out of Bosher’s and Lisee’s book, was a man who looked about the same age as Oswald; actually he was younger, but older looking, and he was presenting himself as a communist FLQ terrorist.

FIRST STOP, INTELLIGENCE.

During my research on De Gaulle, in 2002, one of the first thing I found on the Internet www.uni.ca/library/ascot.html, was an entry explaining “notes,” written by a Carlos Roldan, PhD, on the subject of “Operation Ascot,” a code name for France’s interventionist plans for French Canadian independence. I was no longer in school during this period; what had begun as a school project became a function of my high level of curiosity, and my research became driven by the discovery of oddity present in the written documents I was researching. The Internet find on “Operation Ascot” talked about the murder of a FLQ terrorist name Francois Mario Bachand.

I notice immediately that neither of the two books that I had read on the same subject, The Gaullist Attack on Canada and In The Eye of the Eagle, mentioned Francoise Mario Bachand, despite the fact both books went into great detail about the “subversives” Louise Beaudoin, her husband, Francois Dorlot, and their eventual mainstreaming into the French Canadian provincial government. According to the “Ascot” notes, they had sheltered Mario Bachand, a fellow FLQ operative, in Paris just days before his assassination. There was little else at the time that I could find on Bachand, and I could find nothing on the author of this piece, except a doctor in New Mexico that had the same name.

Later, I would find other references, including a reference to the book Last Stop, Paris, and I would ask my researcher in France to look for pictures and news articles in reference to Bachand. She could find nothing at all in French library indexes on what had to be a sensational crime. This was very odd. Bachand was young like Oswald, around at about the same time; he was claiming to be a communist and hanging around Castro aficionados, I thought his death, more than six years after Oswald’s, precluded him from consideration. Surely, given he was the French (Canadian), assassin the History Channel spoke of, he would have been done away with sooner, not later, but when I found he was sentenced to jail for four years, immediately after Kennedy’s assassination, I put him back into consideration and began to try again to find information and a picture of him. I wanted to see if he looked like Oswald. You can see from the pictures below that they share the same features, and body builds. Bachand is two inches taller at 5” 11.” One of the causes of disagreement that started the two Oswald theories was the fact Oswald’s Department of Defense card said he was 5’ 11” and not the 5’ 9” height he really was.

OSWALD* BACHAND*--------------------- OSWALD*

*Digitized mustache *Gazette collection PA 191628 *Digitized mustache

The book Last Stop, Paris is poorly written; perhaps it would be better to describe the book as poorly crafted. Its agenda is an attempt to reverse what was, until the time of this book, an unreported rumor of Bachand’s death as one orchestrated by his fellow FLQ members, to one perpetrated by Canadian intelligence services. The book’s first chapter begins the day before his death, and ends with his death the next day. Like John Kennedy, someone fired on Bachand's head three times. One shot missed; one hit his upper neck, and the last shot went through the top of his head.

The book’s author proceeds from the first chapter with a flash back to 1960 and the formation of a new group working peacefully for Quebec’s independence call RIN. He then says its action off shoot, the FLQ, developed from it, supposedly from the efforts of one Belgian immigrant named Georges Schoerters, who was ostensibly a big fan of the revolutionary Fidel Castro. He met Castro at his press conference in Montreal, after his revolutionary victory, spoke with him privately, and received an invitation to visit him in Cuba. It is important to note that Mr. Schoerters spent his youth in Belgium during the Second World War as a spy and courier for the resistance. It is even more important to ask you at this time, to ask yourself the question about everyone I will write about in this segment: Are you big, are you small, or are you really Alice after all. Michael McLoughlin, the author of this odd book goes into detail about the use of the intelligence communities’ habitual practice of creating “legends.” Therefore, you must play the exhausting game of simultaneously assigning to every character in this book the part of the right pretending to be the left, the left pretending to be the right, or the real Alice after all.

Below I have given you two archived and one recent link to stories about the FLQ found in a Google search. Please right click to open the links. The first article, written in 1963 from Time magazine’s archive, talks about the arrest of seventeen men for the accidental death of a security guard and describes Georges Schoeters as the communist ringleader of the group. It does not mention Bachand. The article does say that the authorities were “tipped off.” The second is a McGill University archived document that talks about the ringleaders of the FLQ as Georges Schoeters, Raymond Villeneuve, and Gabriel Hudon. Nowhere is the name of Francois Mario Bachand mentioned in the article.

The last entry from Coolopolis, dated January 8, 2007, is an interview with the former terrorist, Raymond Villeneuve, who claims operational leadership of the FLQ for himself, and relegates Schoerters to its philosophical leader. The interviewer questions Villeneuve on several members of the FLQ, including Richard Bros, who Coolopolis describes as a bisexual, French born, male model, heroin runner, who knew Bachand and who died a mysterious death in a London jail, on November 22, 1970, not too long before Bachand met his untimely end.

The interviewer brings up Last Stop, Paris and asks Villeneuve's opinion of the book’s premise that Canadian intelligence killed Bachand. Villeneuve side steps the question by calling McLoughlin a nut and a mythmaker, and points to his myths as those of making up FLQ operatives who were big nothings and in no position of leadership.

Finally, in the Villeneuve interview with Coolopolis, he tells us that Georges Schoeters did not stay in Belgium when he was deported, he went to Switzerland and disappeared; moreover, Raymond Villeneuve knew that he was now deceased. Up until I read this statement, I was quite sure Georges Schoeters was Alice after all; Switzerland may be where communists go to defect. This as-far-to-the-right-country-as-it-get is not where they go to live.

File Format: Microsoft Word - View as HTML
(The RIN was very leftist, as well as being separatist. ...Schoeters had fought in the Belgian resistance at the end of World War II and provided ...
www.mcgill.ca/files/maritimelaw/C.doc - Similar pages

There was a little group, Hudon, George Schoeters, who I think is dead now. ... There was a leftist tendency, with Vallieres, the socialist thing, ...
coolopolis.blogspot.com/2007/01/chat-with-flq-terrorist-raymond.html - 41k - Cached - Similar pages

I have to agree with the first statement of Villeneuve; the Last Stop, Paris author makes no bodies into some bodies. McLoughlin takes a position in his book that words talk louder than actions. He builds a case for Bachand as the dangerous leader of the FLQ simply based on some 1970 unexpected, frantic meetings by the intelligence communities of Canada, Britain, the United States, and France, about new evaluation briefings on Bachand, as the leader of the FLQ, and a man that had to be stopped. Francois Mario Bachand was about as know and written about in his time as the Passamaquoddy Dam.

Before we go any further with a dissection of this very-amazing-for-all-the-wrong reasons-book, let us stop to review the author-blurb at the back of the book. The author is a story consultant for the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s program on the press called the “Fifth Estate.” He handled its segments “on security and intelligence issues.” As you recall from the previous section “Blame Canada,” the Canadians do not have wide-open access to their archives, and only “sanctioned” researchers may access archives of the government. Mr. McLoughlin is therefore sanctioned by his intelligence services and undoubtedly wrote this book and obtained his research with the permission of the intelligence community upon which he has built his livelihood.

The about-the-author blurb goes on to say that the author discovered the Bachand story while working on a book on Canadian intelligence services. He apparently began the book in 1993 and supposedly interview intelligence services in Canada and in France, and he interviewed FLQ members. Therefore, it is very telling that Mr. Raymond Villeneuve does not say he was interviewed by McLoughlin and calls him a nut. Mr. Raymond Villeneuve was clearly described as the leader of the original FLQ by McLoughlin himself in his own book.

Eight-five percent of this book on Bachand is about other people. Six percent of the book is about what Bachand was being made out to be without substantiating proof, and the other nine percent is actually about Bachand.

Starting with what we are told by McLoughlin about Bachand as fact, we learn that he was born in the spring of 1944, the third of five children and that he would lose his mother when he was three years old to tuberculosis. (In other research on the web, I found that Bachand’s mother was of Cree Indian blood, the probable source of his very dark, brown-black hair. While I have not been able to substantiate this fact elsewhere, a keyword search of Quebec and tuberculosis only brings up the Cree and Eskimo tribes as reference. It seems that T.B. was rampant in their population, especially in the forties when his mother died.)

McLoughlin says that Bachand completed tenth grade and names the school he attended; then says he did complete high school to the twelfth grade, but does not say where. His father is described as a “fervent” Catholic. Please note the use of the word fervent, rather than the word devote. Andre Bachand was a government official; he headed the Public Works Department of the City of Montreal, and he is described as a Quebec nationalist. Mario Bachand began dating a girl when he was 17, Louise Bachand, who became his wife and gave birth to his daughter, Elsa in, July 1962

Bachand was an artist of the beatnik genre that attended a prestigious art school, called at that time Ecole des Beaux-Arts, patterned after a school of the same name in Paris. He had a professed interest in politics that was, like Oswald to the left of left, communism. He would hang out at a nearby café with his friends and discuss politics. He and “his friends,” McLoughlin says, formed two groups that year, one for national liberation, which was quickly dissolved, and then they formed a club for “young communists.” McLoughlin, prior to introducing the young Bachand in his book has already introduced is to the beginning of the FLQ and its leaders Villeneuve, Schoeters, and Hudon, and he tells us about the journalist/law student, Francois Dorlot, who would always be in the shadows of the FLQ members, but he and his wife, Louise Beaudoin, rose within the Quebec government with a legitimate life. You will recall that Dorlot and his wife are accused by the author Bosher as being “subversives,” and very close to France

About this time, in March of 1963, Canada’s security services, according to McLoughlin, started to hang out at the La Paloma Café and infiltrate the varying groups that frequented the café, including Bachand McLoughlin does not name the infiltrators. The first report on Bachand registered in intelligence files describes him as 5’10’ with dark brown hair, a mustache, and given to wearing sweaters and a windbreaker. He is described as very violent, without a description of just how in the small café he manifested his violence. They note that Bachand has no gainful employment, and it is suggested his father supports him.

Michael McLoughlin continues to narrate the on going benign violence of the FLQ and their small bombings in low profile places. He states that Bachand was followed everywhere and monitored. Bachand is not among the bombers. On April 12 1963, he tells us the police raid Bachand’s home and find nothing. On April 20, 1963 according to McLoughlin, Raymond Villeneuve, talks a young seventeen-year-old friend, into joining Hudon to plant a bomb; Villeneuve does not accompany them. A security guard is accidentally killed in the explosion. Meanwhile the surveillance on Bachand watches his daily routine, starting with ritual of breakfast alone, or with friends, attending art school and talking politics at the La Paloma Café.

Then, we are told, in early May, 1963, the FLQ acquired a mountain cottage. Well not exactly. The cottage belongs to Jacques Lanciault, who we will discover later in the book is an informant. Meanwhile more bombing go on, none of which Bachand is involved in; he still doing his beatnik artist thing and hanging out at La Paloma.

Then McLoughlin says the FLQ members decide to have a retreat at the informant’s cottage to plan and reorganize. They bring Bachand along. This is the first time Bachand is described as in their company, outside of the La Paloma café, and remember that he was being constantly monitored according to McLoughlin. The purpose of Bachand invitation to the cottage is to talk to him about being to talkative about the organization; however, one of the people that the author interviewed said that Bachand had no desire to talk or plan, left the company of the FLQ members, and took a 303 rifle into the woods to shoot ─ for hours. “He returned after midnight, exhausted.” Now in one instant we have gone from Bachand the artist beatnik to Bachand the marksman.

On May 16 1963, Bachand is at home with his family, when there is a knock at the door, FLQ members ask Bachand to accompany them on a mission. Bachand does accompany fellow FLQ friends to put bombs in mailboxes; he is the only one to cover his face in the car. The next day, an officer is maimed disarming one of the bombs. On June 1, 1963, there is a big meeting with many FLQ members including the informant, but not including Bachand; he was not there. Lanciault asks for and receives a complete list of all FLQ members. McLoughlin states that he had gained the confidence of the group by setting off a bomb next to an oil tank that turned out to be empty. Later that afternoon, arrests began. Bachand was arrested June 4, 1963, after work; he had just gotten a job painting for the City of Montreal. The arrests totaled twenty-three members of the FLQ, according to Coolopolis, seventeen according to Time magazine.

Bachand was actually one of four who were not charged with the accidental death of the security guard, according to the book Last StopParis, but rather for the accidental maiming of the officer trying to disarm planted mailbox bombs

On September 13, 1963, while awaiting trial, Bachand, the alleged terrorist, is bailed out of jail by none other than a journalist from the La Press newspaper, called Paul Rochon. McLoughlin states he was a sympathetic journalist, who convinced the court to lower bail from ten thousand dollars to five thousand dollars, a considerable sum in today’s dollars.

I thought the fact a journalist bailed out an accused terrorist to be the most incredible thing I had ever read about the press; therefore, I did some research into the ownership of La Press. It is and was owned by Groupe Gesca., a seven paper holding company that is and was owned by the Canadian Power Company, owned at the time by a gentleman named Arthur Nesbitt, who received his financial break from Max Aitken, know best as Lord Beaverbrook, the Canadian who owned pulp and paper companies in the area of the Passamaquoddy Dam. He would move to England and become a media magnate, who was a close associate of K.C. Irving and John Paul Getty. The Nesbit family would sell the majority of the power company in 1968, and then their papers in 1970.

McLoughlin description of Paul Rochon as a sympathetic journalist is difficult to fathom. La Press was anti secessionist and to the far right of center publication. Nesbit and his family were staunch Federalists. It is not easy to understand how an employee from this publication could have sympathy for an alleged communist terrorist, who was hanging out with alleged rabid secessionists.

Bachand, the Last Stop, Paris author tells us, then went missing. He did not show for his October 7, 1963 court hearing. A mustached Leon Oswald that appeared with two other men, “in late September, at the Texas home of Cuban expatriate and Warren Commission witness, Sylvia Odio, fits the description of Bachand precisely. The man, who appeared in Alice, Texas with a blonde woman and a small female child, fits the description of Bachand. He had a wife, whose hair color I have been unable to find, and he had a small female child.

Michael McLoughlin then gets very vague about dates. He states that on October 9, 1963, Bachand was on two islands that belonged to France, with two other FLQ runaways. It is not possible to be on two islands at once, and one wonders if the material or the interviewee the author got his information from, did not say which island. Then we are told at some point in time, but we are not told when, Bachand and his fellow FLQ members take a ferry to Maine and a bus to Boston, where at some point, the police pick them up, while they were waiting to board a bus to Mexico. Bachand is deported back to Canada, where he is arrested at the airport. We are next put in time perspective by the date of November 27, 1963, five days after Kennedy’s death. We are told that on that date, Bachand pleads guilty to participation in the bombings. He is sentenced to four and a half years. We are not told if at that time he is put in jail.

Michael McLoughlin does not tell us what date or what happened when Bachand was arrested upon his return from Boston. Did he get out of jail again after making a plea bargain? Before we find out, a laborious interceding chapter of thirteen pages, enumerating more capers by FLQ members that had nothing to do with Bachand, introduces Michele Duclos, the woman that will visit Bachand in Paris the day he dies. She is involved in a convoluted, terrorist dynamite caper to the United States which results in her arrest with others, before anything happens, she testifies against the others who are convicted; she is sentenced to five years, but three months later, the judge revoked her sentence, and she was put on probation; she immediately left for France, and then Lebanon and then Mexico. Of course probation does not allow you to leave the country; therefore when McLoughlin wraps up his book by telling us she is really working for the Canadian intelligence services, it is an unsurprising and credible statement.

We find out with great description in the next chapter, that Bachand is taken to jail on December 16, 1963. We are told exactly what his jailers do when he gets there. The very first thing they do is take his picture; then they remove his personal belongings, throw away his clothing, take his fingerprints, and send him to be weighed and measured. He was 5’11” and 145 pounds. After three months at the maximum-security prison, he is transferred to a medium security new prison with many benefits like a gym and music lessons.

Michael McLoughlin picture section of his book shows the December 16, 1963 mug shots of Bachand. He does not ─for the first time ─sport a mustache. If the black wavy haired shooter that was described in the window of the Texas School Book Depositary and at the scene of Officer Tippit’s death was Bachand, he could not have been sporting a mustache, in order to pass from a distance for Oswald. Nothing so far has contradicted my hunch, which even I thought was silly, when I first thought of the possibility.

At Bachand’s prison counseling interview, he gives conflicting and revealing statements; he says he is not a communist, only a socialist, and that the Castro aficionado, Georges Schoeters was right wing, which aligns with his retirement in Switzerland, but not with his sojourns with Castro. Bachand is paroled after only a little over two years. He is told to stay away form the FLQ and he does. He organizes a few demonstrations.

In this chapter, McLoughlin degenerates to the ridiculous. He says the security services where now watching Bachand, because they were sure he is going to try to hurt Prime Minster Trudeau at a parade where he was to speak. They follow Bachand everywhere; he does nothing out of the ordinary. Then he says, ironically, Bachand is given a job by the Canadian government that can help in his plan to thwart Trudeau’s speech “or worse.” The day for Trudeau’s attendance at a parade comes. There are many chants of “revolution”; there is a riot, many are arrested; Bachand is not one of them. Trudeau stares down the crowd; it is all televised, and just by chance the election is the next day and he overwhelmingly defeats the separatist party.

There are many French Canadian scholars other than Bosher and the journalist Lisee that think both the early FLQ and the later “October Crisis” were orchestrated by the Canadian security services to make the separatist party look violent and undesirable, so no one would vote for them. McLoughlin’s book supports their theories. The French Canadians did not need a revolutionary group to implement secession. Canada is a democracy, and they can simply vote for independence ─and they have, and they have come very, very close to a majority vote for secession. How much simpler it would have been to simply make a motion to declare war if Quebec tried to succeed. We did. The thought of tanks in their streets would have far surpassed the sundry, mostly benign actions of the FLQ. Of course then Canada could not have created a hoard of “legends” that could go overseas and spy for them. That is where the FLQ hoard all ended up; including Bachand, whom after being divorced by his wife was free from obligations. And by the way, McLaughlin relates, FLQ members went to Texas to get weapons.

Bachand supposedly flees the country, after he is arrested on what McLoughlin says are baseless charges, after a non violent meeting planning Operation McGill, a demonstration to demand McGill teach in French. He is released on bail; gets a visa for Paris and the security services surveillance team takes his picture as he leaves, but does not stop him, as it should have stopped someone on parole. From Paris he goes to Madrid and then to Cuba, where he hooks up with Villeneuve and two other FLQ members. After a time he leaves for Algiers, then Paris, returns to Cuba, and then goes to Paris again, via Algeria, as before.

McLoughlin tells us, while he is in Algiers; he speaks on the radio, under an alias about revolution, much as supposedly he spoke in silhouette on Canadian television under both an alias, and as himself, just as Oswald did with NBC’s Bill Moyers. Right after this revelation, he tells us about a Canadian freelance journalist setting out for a gorilla terrorist training camp to interview Palestinian terrorists. They do not interview Palestinian terrorists; they by chance hear French accents and end up interviewing, Salem and Selim, supposed French, FLQ terrorists. The film crew and journalist return to Canada; the filming is never shown, but there is a story in major publications about the episode.

McLoughlin comes right out and assures us he has been told that the free lance journalist and the press were cooperating with intelligence. Salem and Selim are Canadian intelligence officers for whom a “legend” is being created, so they can spy for Canada. The practice was common, McLoughlin tells us. Needless to say, if this practice was rote and the public had been aware of it, no one would have convicted Oswald; under the circumstances, there was a 50/50 chance that both Oswald and Bachand were “legends” too.

The book goes on and on, trying to build a case against the need to “neutralize” Bachand, based on the actions of everyone else but him. Why? Why Bachand and not the others, who were doing so much more in the way of at least seeming to be terrorists?

My research on Oswald and conspiracy theories has been recent; when I found a file called the “Torlitt Document,” I was astounded that there was a conspiracy theory, with a “Binga Banga” theory similar to my “Binga, Banga Bunga” motivation theory. The “Torlitt Document” says that the assassination of John Kennedy and Charles de Gaulle where related and planned by the same group ▬ out of Montreal. The “Torlitt Document” leaves out Khrushchev.

The missing element is the motive for JFK’s death. The Torlitt Document builds no case for a motive. Nevertheless, it does build a case for a motive for Bachand’s death, and that of his friend Richard Bros'. In was released in 1970, the same year of all those incredible frantic meetings of Canadian, British, and American high level intelligence people; even the American CIA director, Helms went to Canada for four days, and then sent his head of planning for two weeks. In addition, even one member of the French SEDECE came to Canada to meet. This tale of high-level, multi-county meetings is the only interesting thing in the entire Last Stop, Paris saga.

While these meetings are going on, Bachand file is requested to be updated, and a case is built against the most benign member of all, as one who must be neutralized. Theorizing that it was the “Torlitt Document’s” pointing a finger at Montreal, as the planning site of the Kennedy assassination, that set the intelligence communities into a outright panic, and given Bachand was the assassin, it would have to be Bachand, not the others, who were much more active in FLQ events that they needed to build a case against for elimination.

The meeting of the intelligence communities, which occurred in August of 1970 was still two months before the October Crisis. Even if you are to believe French Canadian scholars, who allege the Canadian intelligence services planned the October Crises
themselves, it is doubtful the Canadians would have invited the United States, Britain and France to plan an internal affair. The “Torlitt Document” could be the only thing that could create that much panic, and it fits and substantiates an international plot scenario for the death of John Kennedy.

The “Torlitt Document,” written under the pen name of William Torlitt, is an obvious partial truth that tries to put a new scapegoat face on the assassination. This time it is homosexuals, Zionists, the FBI, Evangelists, NASA NATO, a former Hungarian official, and finally, one oil man, H.L. Hunt. District Attorney Garrison had a tiger by the tale and had to let him go, because he did not do enough research before the trial.

Clay Shaw was a Director of Permindex, a company with offices based in Montreal, Switzerland and Italy. The Montreal administrative head was a former OSS officer recruited by Roosevelt during the Second World War. Supposedly, its function was to run heroin and clandestine operations, including assassinations, and Torlitt says they planned both the Kennedy and De Gaulle assassinations.

Torlitt, which files on the Internet say is a pen name for a Texas attorney, goes on to mention other minor oil companies, President Johnson, John Connelly and others as being involved. He does the connections of connections routine and brings in Michael Paine the husband of Ruth Paine, with whom the Oswalds lived at the time of the assassination, and he names Lord Beaverbrook, as a planner, but his total premise, as he himself states, is to absolve the CIA and blame it all on the FBI and fascist elements, not good right wing conservatives such as himself.

After he goes through all this trouble of removing the CIA from consideration, he tells us there were two Oswalds, and the other Oswald, Leon Oswald, was William Seymour, a CIA agent. He was the man that ran down the hill of the assassination site, and got in the Nash station wagon that a witness saw. Ruth Paine owned a Nash station wagon, Torlitt tells us. Look up Mr. Seymour on the web; he looks nothing like Oswald, albeit he is slender. Remember the only eye witness to see a man in the window shooting describe him as having black hair and would never positively identify Oswald in the line up; he only would say that he looked the most like the man he saw. If he had seen Bachand in that line up, he would have picked him as the man with the right hair color.

Torlitt then does something that Michael McLoughlin does in his book also. After describing Leon Oswald as slender several times, Torlitt describes him as big and husky during his assertion of Seymour’s guilt in the shooting of officer Tippit. Michael McLoughlin, on one occasion, when describing the supposed actions of Bachand, under an alias, in Algiers, describes him as big and husky with enormous hands. Mario Bachand weighed 150 pounds at his death; he was at all times a small boned, slender person, and McLoughlin described him at all other times as a very small man.

How this document was circulated in 1970, I do not know. There was no public Internet at that time. The Garrison trial of Clay Shaw began in 1968 and ran into 1969; this document was written in 1970.

The author of Last Stop, Paris, tries very hard to give a surprise ending to his book by telling us what it was he discovered that set him on the trail of Bachand’s death as one perpetrated by intelligence services. He discovered two documents in Canadian archives, quoting two French papers, on March 30, 1970 about the death of Mario Bachand. He discovers in France that they were actually printed on March 31, 1970.

Frankly, I do not see the big deal in this. The Canadian intelligence service could have been read the stories in advance, or received them by wire; however, I think it is a big deal that my French tenant, who, like my Maine researcher, got intrigued enough to have her mother check for the stories in France, could find nothing indexed on either dates, and could find not one mention of Francois Mario Bachand, or his sensational death.

I think it is more important that the two famous French Canadian historians, Jacques Ferron and Georges Langlois, who both write in depth about the FLQ and the October Crises, never mention Bachand.

The biggest conundrum of all is the fact that every other French Canadian FLQ terrorist but Bachand, including those involved in deaths, are all alive and well, living middle class, middle age lives in Montreal. Bachand is dead.

I believe Bachand was a trained assassin. Given, after an eight-year benign membership in the FLQ, he suddenly threw the intelligence services of three countries into a panic, coincident with the “Torlitt Document,” I believe he was Leon Oswald. The information I found on the Internet that says the Canadian government was upset about Bachand’s death; according to McLoughlin, is not true.. They transferred the investigation to Interpol to bury it. Interpol can do nothing without the involved country’s direction.

We have but one question left to ask. Why was the book Last Stop, Paris written? McLoughlin tells us that just before Bachand was assassinated, the city council of Montreal renamed Armstrong Street, a street made famous in the October Crisis, rue Bachand. “It had nothing to do with Francois Mario Bachand,” the author says. If rue Bachand is not his tribute, then perhaps this book is.

NOTE: In June of 2007 I was contacted by the author of this book. A debate ensued in a series of e mails back and forth, whereby I argue that in his book the assassination of Francois Mario Bachand mimed the assassination of John Kennedy, and that the book contained a dropping in the purported passport number of Bachand located on page 6 of his book. Given I am right, and I am sure that I am, this would mean the JFK plot’s field commanders, and the assassins themselves, met in the basement of the Texas School Book Depository in the early morning hours of November 22, 1963. Once I realized what the Last Stop Paris author was doing with his book, I researched and found that the Texas School Book Depository does have a basement, and it was the site of two arson attempts in 1972 and 1984. Yet still there may be fingerprints there. The emails are available to any journalist who will tell the story of John Kennedy’s Dream of Passamaquoddy and its competitor Hydro Quebec.

PRELUDE TO A MOVIE:

When I walked up the steps of the New York Public Library in September of 2000, I thought that the motive of my movie was money; all the money that would be lost should the precedent of tidal power come to the public’s attention. Before the first year of my research was done, I had decided that the root of JFK’s murder was religion, and I would reinforce that opinion, as I moved through the research, for one reason: The dam could have been stopped; it was the height of the cold war; Khrushchev was banging his shoe on the table and threatening to bury us; our fear of the communistic infringement on free enterprise and free thought was never far from our mind; had the press pursued — with front page vigor — the concept that the dam was communistic and a threat to free enterprise, it would have been put asunder ; the press did not; save the brief mention on the July 16, 1963 press conference that the press could not have avoided covering, there was not any coverage to speak of on what was a great story and a huge battle. The premise of my movie, therefore would be: JFK died for his Catholic faith.

I had found the vehicle for what I wanted − a very big and very ugly movie − in the many pages of Paul Fisher’s notes on the New Age Masonic Magazines. I was torn morally on how to implement a “History by Hollywood” effort. I actually disagreed with the liberal license that film had to fabricate, desecrate, skew and eschew accurate history . . . and the people that shaped it. In the New Age material, however, I had truth, ugly malevolent truth.

I decide I would use the New Age pronouncements, they would emanate from the mouths of my characters, and I would convince America, just like I was convinced that our business, political and religious leaders, belonging to America’s secret societies, were ugly, malevolent men, capable of and certainly powerful enough, to plan, carry out and cover up the assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy — and get away with it, because in 1963, they were ubiquitous.

TREATMENT:

A FOUR PART FICTIONAL STORY BEGINNING IN 1954 AND RUNNING TO SEPTEMBER 11 2001, TELLING THE DARK STORY OF A YOUNG BOY’S RISE TO THE TOP OF FREEMASONRY AND THE PRESS- AS A NEWSPAPER PUBLISHER WHO ATTEMPTS TO PUT THE STORY OF THE QUODDY DAM FRONT AND CENTER IN HIS NEWSPAPER.

THE STORY IS SET IN THE STATES OF MAINE AND VERMONT, AGAINST THE HISTORIC BACKDROP OF JOHN F. KENNEDY’S RISE TO POWER; HIS PUSH TO WIN THE RACE AGAINST RUSSIA AND FRANCE TO BUILD THE WORLD’S FIRST TIDAL DAM AT PASSAMAQUODDY BAY IN MAINE; HIS ASSASSINATION; THE QUASHING OF THE DAM; THE RISE OF HYDRO QUEBEC AS THE DAM’S ALTERNATIVE; THE INQUEST INTO HIS ASSASSINATION; THE REOPENING OF INVESTIGATIONS IN THE MID SEVENTIES, AND THE ON GOING CONSPIRACY OF SILENCE OF THE MAIN STREAM MEDIA ON THIS STORY

The movie roots in the year 1954, on the shores of Passamaquoddy Bay, and moves in its first episode to October 19, 1963 in Orono, Maine where Matthew Brackett, a journalism student, sits in the University of Maine’s stadium and listens to a speech by President John Kennedy that begins “In the year 1715 . . . .”

Once you consider the assassination of John Kennedy from Paul Fisher’s perspective as possibly one of Masonic conspiracy, it is plain to see how such a conspiracy could be implemented and spirited, unnoticed, through the annals of American history . . . with the greatest of ease. You only have to ask who was a secret society member and what positions of power they held as religious, business and government leaders. As to the “someone would have talked,” comments of authors trying to perpetuate the myth of the lone assassin; secret societies were as ruthless about their code of silence with their members as any mafia Don, and unlike the Mafia they had the trust and respect of Americans, because they were our leaders and statesman.

Recently, a famous prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi, wrote a 1600 page book rehashing the government evidence, in support of the loan assassin theory. It is not the government’s evidence that can be used to support the government findings — given we consider the Warren Commission, save the Catholic Hale Boggs, was investigating itself and those they were conspiring with.

Mr. Bugliosi says that to point the figure at our government and its leaders is to “attack America.” This is a surprising statement from a learned man of the law; for what he is saying is that once someone occupies a position of respect in the American government, they are exempt form the concept of “equal justice under the law,” because their prosecution would be a prosecution of America. Nothing could be further from the truth; we are not Ameri-duh the Beautiful anymore, and getting the loved and credible Tom Hanks to star in a ten part mini series of Vincent Bugliosi’s book will do nothing to convince the public otherwise.

Hale Boggs, the token Catholic member of the commission, just before his death in a plane crash, lamented that he wished he never consented to serve on the commission, and he stating publicly that he believed it was a cover-up, and he pointed to the Masonic Arlen Spector and the Masonic J. Edgar Hoover as the main instruments of evidence suppression and cover up.

Until we openly address the possibility that our Protestant leaders of government, business and religion conspired to save the Republic from the Catholic President, we have not solved this heinous crime. There is more circumstantial evidence in this essay than has been used to convict a myriad of lesser Americans.

In 1995, Bill Clinton apologized for theatrocities during the MK ULTRA, mind control experiments, when unsuspecting people were fed mind destabilizing drugs. Don Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney had gone personally to the family of Frank Olsen to apologize for the action of the government’s administering of the drugs to their father, without his knowledge. President Gerald Ford brought the widow of Frank Olsen to the White House.

Frank Olsen committed suicide, just before the CIA was to put him in the Chestnut Lodge, the same mental institution that Phil Graham was sent to. Frank Olson was attending philosophy classes at a Catholic University before the drugs were administered to him; he had been talking to his professor and classmates about the morality of non conventional, “Bio” weapons. Frank Olson was one of the CIA’s own; working with them through Army Intelligence on the mind control; drugs and on other biological weapons. Why is it so hard to believe that an organization that could be guilty of this type of activity with one of its own could not be the one plotting the assassination of John Kennedy?

There was one person that could have given such a conspiracy trouble, because he loved John Kennedy and was in a position of power that would have enabled him to cast a huge shadow of doubt over the official government line that Kennedy was shot by Oswald, acting alone. He had proved that he had the type of character not to fall in line under pressure, as he had demonstrated in his defense of Alger Hiss. He was a good friend of the CIA, bringing his newspaper and others into consort with the CIA, through their “Project Mockingbird.” That person was Phillip Graham. Like Olson, he was an Army Intelligence officer and he was the powerful publisher of the Washington Post

Graham loved John Kennedy; John Bishop, the author of a book on JFK’s death, spells out that President Kennedy planned to try and buy out the rest of the Washington Post from Katherine Graham’s family for his friend, when his presidency was over. He was conveniently dead before Kennedy was shot; therefore, I decided to choose as my sullied hero, in this epic story of the American underbelly, a character that followed both the career path of this enigmatic newspaperman and the enthusiasm of the Portland Press Herald’s publisher for the Dam’s construction. He would suffer the same fate as Frank Olson.

My hero does not die before Kennedy is assassinated, but, like the famous and brilliant publisher of the Washington Post, he does suffer a mental breakdown that is participated by his internal, moral struggle between his allegiance to his journalist principals and his allegiance to the Masonic creed, plus he gets a little help from mind controlling drugs used in the CIA MK ULTRA period, administered by a trusted associate.

Acid guru Timothy Leary −and others− have theorized that this is exactly what happened to the Washington Post publisher, who began acting erratically about the same time Oswald left for the USSR.

The film starts in the present day with his sister’s arrival at a Chestnut-Lodge-like institution to remove him and take him home for a visit, much as Phillip Graham was removed from the Chestnut Lodge and taken home, before his suicide, by his estranged wife, Katherine Graham. The opening scenes of the movie begin at the sanatorium, and end with Matthew quoting from the introduction of Edgar Allen Poe’s “The Tell Tale Heart.”

The film is in part autobiographical for me; it incorporates many memories from my childhood summers in Eastport Maine. I and my cousins would lie on the floor in my grandmother’s bedroom to listen to a radio program of scary stories. Poe’s Tell Tale Heart was the most terrifying of all of them. In my movie Matthew and his sibling and cousin listen to the same program and ask their mother the same question at its conclusion that I asked my Grandmother.” Is there really an “Evil Eye?” My grandmother’s words emanate from Matthew’s mother: “No Mattie. There is no Evil Eye; it was the man who killed the poor old man that was evil. There is no excuse for murder.” This would become the moral of my story. We would watch the Catholic Kennedy be made into the feared Evil Eye. His Dream of Passamaquoddy stars as the beating heart they had to bury, least everyone know that the motive for his murder was the precedent of the dam, a precedent that would speedily eliminate the need for fossil fuel and the dangerous nuclear power.

This movie’s focus was the press; our last fail safe. Secret Societies controlled it and the press abdicated its investigative function totally in the matter of the “Death of a President.” I used the press to tell the story: On the radio, in cars and homes: the war in Algiers; the ascent of De Gaulle; the issue of French Canadian succession; Hydro Quebec’s birth. On the coffee table: a Life magazine featuring the young Senator Kennedy and his family on the cover, an anti Catholic pamphlet. On the newest media venue that would reign supreme after the assassination, television, we would watch the first Catholic President take his short place in history, and we would watch the press firmly establish itself as our Ministry of Information by committing George Orwell’s cardinal sin —lies of omission.

A ferry opens the story’s flash back to 1954. It carries a Canadian who is a Mason. It is Sunday, and he is on his way to his church. He is late. When he enters the church the sermon has begun. It is a sermon based on Jewish Mysticism, Ezekiel's vision of the wheels of God’s chariot which run and return, run and return, just like the Sephrot in The Book of Creation of Jewish Mysticism, run and return, just like the mighty tides of the Passamaquoddy Bay, run and return. The scene runs and returns from the Protestant Church to the town’s Catholic Church service in Latin and to the home of the town’s only Jew who struggles with a Bar Mitzvah lesson for his son sent to him by a Rabbi in Bangor. ( A True Story. There was one Jew in this small town.)

At the end Mattie commits an ostensible suicide in the cold waters of John Kennedy’s Passamaquoddy Bay. As the slack tide changes and begins its run back to the ocean, we see Mattie’s body surface and run from us on the tides. The Masonic sheriff writes the report, the Masonic doctor performs the autopsy and the Masonic publisher of the town newspaper writes the story of Mattie’s life and death.

My movie, my movie, I mourn every time I look at the envelope that contains 80 Plus pages of part one of a “Roots-like” four part television epic called "Quoddy.” To say my professor did not like my subject matter is beyond an understatement; the period that I worked on the script with my University of Miami professor ran concurrent with my beginning of correspondence with Paul Fisher, who told me about the strong Masonic influence in Hollywood.

There was another issue involved. My professor thought I had previous recent screen writing training; I did not. While in New York that September, I had read the entire screen plays of Billy Wilder, my favorite, but unbeknownst to me, screen writing had been paired down since Wilder’s days to the bare bones of dialogue, and scene description had been all but eliminated. Some Hollywood guru had decided that screen description was part of directing. I hired a film student at the University of Miami to train me on the new format and kept writing.

I found my professor overly bullish on the technical aspects of my works, because at every meeting he would leave the brow beating efforts on the technicalities and try to convince me to leave the subject matter I was working on. In a review of my script, he had written by my New Age dialogue: Boring! Take it out.” I bore easily. I found the New Age material mind-boggling; so did all my friends that read it.

My professor had valid arguments about my work from the standpoint of the text book rules, such as too many characters and not introducing my main character quickly enough, and I was stubborn about taking his advise. My chief protagonist was a decoy, I explained; the real lead was the cult of secret society; I had to show its osmotic effect on a society; therefore, I had to create the society.

I begged him to go with it and let me finish; he pleaded with me to write a different screenplay. In the end, he threw up his hands and was done with me. He wanted to give me an incomplete; perhaps, I could find another professor to work with me, he said I demanded an F. It was the most frustrating experience of my life. I have never failed miserably at anything. That evening at my home, as I filed away my efforts, I noticed my instructor’s final comments. “You have mastered the technicalities of screen writing,” he wrote.

When I began this project, I was just doing my freedom tap dance, exercising my American right to point my finger at the powerful and to explore a subject that intrigued me. Ultimately, I came to believe my own theory. This country is not perfect, but it has always righted its wrongs. There is something so compelling about the integrity of our constitutional premise;, they always prevail in the end. As I finish this essay, Britain has just finished their “White Paper” on energy. They will focus on ocean power, tidal and wave. Finally in this dangerous world, some current energy powers have decided to put their countries interests over their own.

Below, I have pasted emails to NARA about the fact that after the many times the Warren Report describes the streets of the President’s route as Houston, Main and Elm, the Warren CommissionReport, in Chapter Six, describes the streets as Houston MAINE and Elm. Main Street has had an e added to it to make it the name of the state of Maine, the home of JFK’s Dream of Passamaquoddy. I have sent an e mail to obtain copies of all hand written changes to the final document and all its drafts. ( NOTE: I have been told I have to go to Washington to get them myself.

Finally at the end of the e mails to NARA you will find in emails to NOAA Florida’s Senator Nelson and the Harvard office of the Union of Concerned Scientists-the payback for John Kennedy’s quashed tidal dream.

Thank you for your recent inquiry regarding the possible mis-spelling of Main Street in Dallas, Texas, which has been referred to ALIC: Archives Library Information Center.

Although at the moment I am unable to access a hard copy of the Warren Commission Report to verify if it's spelled the same in the paper text, a quick look at a map of Dallas, Texas suggests that you are correct. Houston Street intersects Main and Elm near Dealey Plaza. Thus the spelling of Main Street as M-A-I-N-E Street is simply a typo.

I hope that this information is of use to you. Once again, thank you for your interest in the National Archives and Records Administration.

This question was submitted via the Main Inquire Form
by a user of the National Archives web site.

DATE SUBMITTED:
Monday, 2/5/2007 at 12:31 pm EST

QUESTION TOPIC:
John F. Kennedy assassination records collection

QUESTION TEXT:
In the Warren Commission Report Chapter six, page 250. A street in Dallas in described as M-A-I-N-E Street, Is this a typo? Did you mean M-A-I-N Street, or is there a street in Dallas named after the state of Maine.

Thank you for your recent follow-up inquiry regarding the possible mis-spelling of Main Street in Dallas, Texas, which has been referred to ALIC: Archives Library Information Center.

By the phrase "hard copy" I mean the printed document as it originally appeared in paper. When I replied to your inquiry on Saturday, I was at a location that did not have a copy of the Warren Commission Report for me to access and compare against the online version on the NARA website. I don't know what method was used to electronically capture the text of the report but I do know that even scanned text can have errors. That's why I looked at a map of Dallas and concluded that it was simply mis-spelled.

This morning I did access a copy of the Warren Commission Report and found the same mis-spelling of Maine Street as M-A-I-N-E Street. Thus NARA's electronic version of this mis-spelling is true to that found in the original printed report. Your theory is interesting, however I still attribute this to simply human error and not conspiracy.

I hope that this information is of use to you. Once again, thank you for your interest in the National Archives and Records Administration.

>>> <A33139production@aol.com> 2/17/2007 3:10 PM >>>
RANDALL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR PROMPT REPLY; HOWEVER, I NEED FOR YOU TO CHECK THAT HARD COPY ALSO, AND I NEED A LITTLE EXPANSION ON YOUR STATEMENT "CHECK THE HARD COPY." DO YOU MEAN THE INTERNET VERSION WAS A SEPARATE TYPING EFFORT AND NOT SCANNED FROM THE ORIGINAL TEXT?

GRANTED IT MAY BE A TYPO, BUT BASED ON MY RESEARCH, IT MAY ALSO BE WHAT I CALL A "DROPPING." FOR REFERENCE TO WHAT I MEAN BY A "DROPPING, "VISIT THE WEB SITE WWW.QUODDYDAM.COM, WHICH TELLS THE STORY OF MY DISCOVERY OF JOHN KENNEDY'S EFFORTS TO BUILD FIVE TIDAL DAMS OFF THE COAST OF MAINE TO SERVE 60 MILLION PEOPLE WITH FREE ELECTRICITY FROM A CLEAN SOURCE.
I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR ANSWER. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR PROMPT REPLY.